Enhanced validation in retryDepositSigned and retryDeposit functions

In the current implementation of the retryDepositSigned function, the conditional check is implemented: if (deposit.isSigned == UNSIGNED_DEPOSIT) revert. This condition triggers a revert if the deposit.isSigned matches UNSIGNED_DEPOSIT. Presently, the contract recognizes only two distinct states: SIGNED_DEPOSIT and UNSIGNED_DEPOSIT. However, given that isSigned is defined as a uint88, there exists a theoretical possibility for it to acquire a value beyond these two predefined states.

To ensure robustness and accommodate any future expansions or unforeseen scenarios, it is advisable to modify the validation logic. A more comprehensive approach would be to implement the check as if (deposit.isSigned != SIGNED_DEPOSIT) revert. This modification ensures that the function only proceeds when the deposit is explicitly in the SIGNED_DEPOSIT state, thereby enhancing the system's resilience against potential anomalies or changes in state definitions.

This recommendation for enhanced validation logic is equally applicable to the retryDeposit function, where a similar pattern of state verification is observed. Implementing this change will contribute to the overall reliability and maintainability of the contract's codebase.

function retryDepositSigned(
       uint32 _depositNonce,
       bytes calldata _params,
       GasParams calldata _gParams,
       bool _hasFallbackToggled
   ) external payable override lock {
       // Get Settlement Reference
       Deposit storage deposit = getDeposit[_depositNonce];

       // Check if deposit is signed
       if (deposit.isSigned == UNSIGNED_DEPOSIT) revert NotDepositOwner();
       ...
   }